With the article by Ken Goe that recently came out about the alleged (I'm assuming it actually happened) body-shaming that took place within the University of Oregon track and field program, many individuals want to share their own experiences or comment on the matter, even if it means potentially triggering others.
I can't wrap my head around the fact that some of the same individuals who are adamant that nobody should ever talk about a woman's body are careless when it comes to posting images of themselves with captions that describe their perceived flaws. I know Kara Goucher means well and I generally like and respect her, but, regarding a recent post, she's ignoring concerns about sending the wrong message. The bigger message, that looking a certain way doesn't have to dictate what a person can achieve, is important, but that's not what she initially said. And if you're at all sensitive to potential stressors on social media, this is exactly the kind of content that can be problematic. But fuck anyone who's too sensitive, right?
What Kara said was, "If you look closely, you will see I have skin hanging over the side of my shorts, there is cellulite on my butt and there are no rock hard abs on my stomach." She goes on to say how fast she ran despite all this and also complains about how focused everyone is on looks, after suggesting everyone look closely at her body. A good point coupled with potentially triggering content will never sit well with me or probably anyone else who has or has had an eating disorder. As one commenter suggested, how do you think seeing an image of a very fit and lean runner with a caption about skin hanging over her shorts and cellulite, real or imagined, makes normal observers feel? This did not sit well with me, either, and I should trust that my initial reaction of shock is shared with at least a few others.
There was a way to word the caption and avoid upsetting anyone. Kara could have mentioned that she's a product of our society or struggled with her body image or that her body was so scrutinized by coaches and fans of the sport that she began to have self-doubt if she didn't look a certain way. Instead, she made a statement about cellulite and skin rolls when she appears visibly lean and extremely fit to anyone on the outside, and it comes off as not well thought out, though the majority of individuals seem to have gotten the point or cheered her on anyway.
In a world of black and white thinking, one in which everyone claims to be right, we have lost all nuance and, therefore, the ability to have meaningful dialogue. This is thanks, in big part, to social media. The way people react to anyone even hinting at expressing a different opinion is extreme. Remembering how people associated with Oiselle treated anyone who expressed a different view years ago, I hesitated to reply to Kara's post but did anyway, saying that I appreciated the comment of someone who pointed out that the post could be triggering. I then tried to clarify what I assume is the deeper meaning.
Rare is the individual who can sit back and say, "I see your point." Instead, defensive responses -- I'm right. You're wrong! -- are encouraged and celebrated, and that almost always leads to a pile on. It's no longer about trying to find answers, it's about proving you're on the right team, even if it means lying or triggering or offending others. If you express an opinion that's contrary to the majority, be ready for some blowback. In this case, it turns out there was no need for me to worry, as my comment was quickly buried by the thousands of heart emoticons others posted in response to the original post.
Regarding the article, some are so determined to show that they condemn coaches who are body-shaming athletes, they're denying science in the process, just flat out making up shit or ignoring facts. Even though I agree with those who claim that the system in place by coach Robert Johnson is flawed, I don't agree that you have to avoid reality in order to prove it. For example, it's true that a lower BMI can aid runners if you just look at physiology and nothing else. There's no reason to say otherwise. It just is, and it's not a judgment about anyone.
A lower BMI generally leads to an increased VO2 Max. Some people refuse to acknowledge this, even though a greater VO2 Max usually contributes to better performance in athletics. An argument against bullying athletes to lose weight can be made, though, when you simply accept that damaging athletes emotionally is bad, period, and it shouldn't be done. Really, fuck that coach. But there's no need to pretend that anyone at any size at all can run competitive elite times or that the studies showing a correlation between VO2 Max and BMI are wrong. You can accept the results of these studies while pointing out that there's more to performance than BMI and VO2 Max levels and how the body is able to use and transport oxygen. Performance really doesn't come down to physiology alone, especially regarding weight and BMI. That's only one aspect of competition, but it is something to consider. The question that needs to be addressed is how to build programs that foster healthy athletes while still allowing them to be successful in sport. That kind of program should never include body-shaming but doesn’t have to ignore numbers completely.
The DEXA scans use at the University of Oregon measure more than body fat. It's unfortunate that a coach would focus more on BMI and end up mistreating athletes while letting important feedback like bone density, which is also measured by the same scans, take the back seat.
The article states:
Johnson contends his scientific approach largely removes human bias from judgments about athletes and allows the UO coaching staff to design workouts precisely tailored to each athlete’s needs.
“Track is nothing but numbers,” he says. “A good mathematician probably could be a good track coach.”
But in this statement, he removes important variables. Humans are complex, emotional beings, not computers or machines you can simply program to run a certain way, well, most of them anyway. The point is that if the mental stress of maintaining a certain BMI or a certain weight is extreme, it won't help an athlete run faster, nor will the physical stress of potentially not getting the right nutrients during formative years. Proper nutrition is especially important for young women who are menstruating, going through puberty, or experiencing growth changes that often require an increase in caloric intake in order for the one going through these experiences to remain healthy.
I think most rational individuals will agree that a healthy approach to training younger athletes is to allow individuals some leeway. Numbers can be used as an effective tool for feedback, but who's to say what BMI is optimal for each individual? Two women who are the same height might run faster and be healthier overall at different weights and at different body fat percentages. Though personal observation is never the same as an actual study, I can't help but think about my time at BYU. Our cross country team had four runners near the top, all of whom could run close to the same time over a 5k course, but all were different body types and weights. That being said, the variations between us weren't extreme. None of us is 7-feet tall, for example.
Coaches, both male and female, who are abusive are prevalent in the running community. It is and has been a widespread problem that's just beginning to be more formally addressed. I'm not sure how to respond to the additional information in the article, such as the bit about how OU has a "cozy relationship with Nike, which underwrites the funding for USA Track & Field and sponsors a high percentage of professional track athletes." I'm more concerned that an athlete was told by a nutritionist that she should consider lowering her body fat to about 13% from 16%. Aside from the fact that track programs need registered dietitians, not nutritionists who don't have the same qualifications, it's just absurd to think that this was a point of focus for the coaching staff instead of overall health, both physical and mental. You just can’t run as well if you're under too much additional stress. Running is hard enough as it is.
Melody Fairchild had probably one of the most thoughtful and sensible responses I have read on the matter. She's someone who is working to make changes in the sport. Instead of complaining about it, like many of us do, she is taking active steps to improve the sport by setting an example as a coach and mentor. The world needs more Melody Fairchilds. She is such a positive light and provides hope when the world can feel so dark.